From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Joseph v. Ervolina

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 18, 1955
285 App. Div. 1218 (N.Y. App. Div. 1955)

Opinion

May 18, 1955.

Present — McCurn, P.J., Vaughan, Kimball, Piper and Wheeler, JJ.


Order as to ordering paragraphs fifth, eighth, and ninth affirmed; otherwise order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements and motion under rule 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice granted and plaintiff directed to serve an amended complaint within twenty days, omitting all objectionable matter, upon payment of $10 costs and the costs of this appeal. Memorandum: The complaint as a whole offends every rule of good pleading and calls for the application of our decision in Isaacs v. Washougal Clothing Co. ( 233 App. Div. 568, 572), "The purpose of pleadings is to present and define the issues to be tried and determined, and not to confound and befog them. * * * The court should not be compelled to wade through a mass of verbiage and superfluous matter in order to pick out an allegation here and there, which, pieced together with other statements taken from another part of the complaint, will state a cause of action." On defendants' motion under rule 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice, therefore, the court held that "the plaintiffs should be required to serve amended complaints omitting all objectionable matter." The order appealed from also directs that defendants submit to an examination before trial. This was error in the absence of the service of an answer. ( Punia v. Dry Dock Sav. Bank, 280 App. Div. 431; Welsh v. Cowles Shipyard Co., 200 App. Div. 724.) All concur.


Summaries of

Joseph v. Ervolina

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 18, 1955
285 App. Div. 1218 (N.Y. App. Div. 1955)
Case details for

Joseph v. Ervolina

Case Details

Full title:RAPHAEL JOSEPH et al., Respondents, v. DOMINIC ERVOLINA et al., Appellants

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: May 18, 1955

Citations

285 App. Div. 1218 (N.Y. App. Div. 1955)

Citing Cases

Weissglass v. Weissglass

However, the seventh paragraph of the complaint, consisting of some thirteen and one-half pages of…

Pearl Delta Funding, LLC v. ABC Auto LLC

* * The court should not be compelled to wade through a mass of verbiage and superfluous matter, in order to…